Conceiving of Superman as a contrast to Batman is cool and all, except that people like Batman because he's flawed, brooding, and complex. Superman is none of those, which is why he's not very interesting.

Click to expand...

Brooding 24/7 leads to disinterest, as it may inspire some to say "get over it," or "here we go again with the 'oh how dark my world is' routine."

Part of the charm of The Avengers movie is that Captain America can be as upright/"light" as a character can be, but he plays well against sour Tony Stark, struggling Banner and noble/arrogant Thor. In other words, the contrasts offer a chance for each character to show what he's made of against someone who sees life in a very different way. If all of the Avergers were bitter, brooding and dark (i.e. a gang of Nolan Batmen), there would be no appeal, as its a one note character trait only a few can relate to.

Conceiving of Superman as a contrast to Batman is cool and all, except that people like Batman because he's flawed, brooding, and complex. Superman is none of those, which is why he's not very interesting.

Click to expand...

Brooding 24/7 leads to disinterest, as it may inspire some to say "get over it," or "here we go again with the 'oh how dark my world is' routine."

Part of the charm of The Avengers movie is that Captain America can be as upright/"light" as a character can be, but he plays well against sour Tony Stark, struggling Banner and noble/arrogant Thor. In other words, the contrasts offer a chance for each character to show what he's made of against someone who sees life in a very different way. If all of the Avergers were bitter, brooding and dark (i.e. a gang of Nolan Batmen), there would be no appeal, as its a one note character trait only a few can relate to.

Click to expand...

Your argument would be more appropriate in a discussion of a Justice League movie, not the next Superman film--which will not have any of those other heroes in it.

also superman has the problem that he's a bit boring due to being unbeatably 'super'. a little personal anguish might add some interest.

Click to expand...

As long as it doesn't change who and what Superman is, then fine. If it serves the story, then fine. But if it just "dark for the sake of dark", which is what alot of TV and movies have been for the last decade, then it's silly.

Conceiving of Superman as a contrast to Batman is cool and all, except that people like Batman because he's flawed, brooding, and complex. Superman is none of those, which is why he's not very interesting.

Click to expand...

Yes, Batman is cool because he's flawed, brooding, and complex. I love the archetype too, but if you turn every character into that it's going to lose its appeal. We all remember the 90's Anti Hero craze, right? What I want from a Superman film is something that's tonally different from The Dark Knight trilogy. I want movies that give me different experiences rather than my favourite thing over and over again. Chocolate ice cream is way better than vanilla ice cream, but I still enjoy vanilla for the variety.

I always took Batman's popularity coming more from the fact that he's a "take no prisoners" type who's willing to beat criminals to a pulp. Sure he doesn't kill, but he'll put you in the ICU suffering from a fractured spine!

I don't know how much this relates to popularity, but fantasies about becoming Batman are less far-fetched than fantasies about becoming Superman.

Click to expand...

So what? Fantasies are just that, fantasies. They'll never be real, so really, what difference does it make which hero you fantasize about becoming?

Personally, I'd love to be a mix of both. I have little money, so having Batman's bank account would be wonderful. Plus, I have cerebral palsy and spend half my life in a wheelchair, so having Superman's powers would, again, be wonderful.

But that's the power of imagination. You can become anything you want. Worrying about how far-fetched a fantasy is should be the LAST thing on anybody's mind.

also superman has the problem that he's a bit boring due to being unbeatably 'super'. a little personal anguish might add some interest.

Click to expand...

As long as it doesn't change who and what Superman is, then fine. If it serves the story, then fine. But if it just "dark for the sake of dark", which is what alot of TV and movies have been for the last decade, then it's silly.

But, I'll reserve judgement on MAN OF STEEL until I actually see it.

Click to expand...

I am tired of the argument that Superman is so powerful. The intrigue of his character is his personal pathos. He has lost two sets of parents and his entire birth world--he is the ultimate immigrant wanting to fit into society but also maintain his heritage. What's more, despite everything that has been thrown at him in life, everything that has been taken away from him, he remains positive and optimistic about the world.

How do you write a story about Superman? Tempt him. Tempt him with returning to his people. Tempt him to give in to his power for the "betterment" of the world. Tempt him with true happiness, truly "fitting in" and finding his place in the world.

or take the idea of 'betterment' to it's most extreme: have him rule the world as a benevolent tyrant so no badness exists and people are terrified of committing even the smallest wrongdoing, like having late library books in case they're beaten up by a flying invincible alien.

The real problem here is that DC and Warner Bros. are unable to do anything original except by accident. They generally just jump on trends and if something works once especially in their superhero properties they just keep doing it over and over again even if it's not right for a particular character.

Chris Nolan was a good fit for Batman because Batman is a character that lends itself to more adult fare with realism and dark drama. Superman is arguably a different type of character, more escapist, even more kid oriented. But because DC scored a hit with Nolan and a particular take theyre going to use that take on their other characters regardless of how appropriate it may or may not be.

And this is far from the first time they've done this. After the Donnor Superman movie was a hit their original plan for Batman was to do beat for beat the exact same movie. You can find the old Tom Mackiewicz script online and see for yourself. Then when they changed gears somewhat by accident and did the Burton film and the Burton film was a hit for a while everything had to be Burtonesque. That's why the lead character on the flash TV show was wearing a bulky rubber suit when he was supposed to be a sleek runner. It's why we almost got the Nicholas Cage Superman lives.

Does this mean the new Superman movie is doomed to failure? No. However it's a shame that DC does not seem willing to try different things with their characters. Their characters are in some ways more diverse than marvels, Most of which were created by the same handful of people. a diverse group of characters like DC has could lend itself to a diverse range of story telling styles or even a diverse range of Film genre: Characters like Batman could be in darker adult affair. Characters like Capt. Marvel or even Superman could be in more family-friendly type films. Most successful companies try to expand and diversify their product lines not limit them to a narrow audience the way that DC seems to want.

I am tired of the argument that Superman is so powerful. The intrigue of his character is his personal pathos.

Click to expand...

Which I would argue is the heart of what the new Superman movie is about. People are complaining that it's emo Superman, but it's trying to make the argument that this is the essence of Superman. The outsider, the one who is invulnerable but has to protect the ones he loves. The one who has a past filled with tragedy as well. All that, based on the trailers, appears to be in this movie.

I am tired of the argument that Superman is so powerful. The intrigue of his character is his personal pathos.

Click to expand...

Which I would argue is the heart of what the new Superman movie is about. People are complaining that it's emo Superman, but it's trying to make the argument that this is the essence of Superman. The outsider, the one who is invulnerable but has to protect the ones he loves. The one who has a past filled with tragedy as well. All that, based on the trailers, appears to be in this movie.

Click to expand...

I'd say that such tragic things would make the best character moments for the character. One of my favorite defining moments in the first Reeve movie is the funeral for his father lamenting the uselessness of all his powers in that moment of Pa Kent's death. It wouldn't have been in the tenor of the George Reeve's series, but went about as close and I wish it had been followed up, was the couple that had found out Superman's identity as Clark Kent. An episode dealing with their death on the mountain could have been a great episode.

I am tired of the argument that Superman is so powerful. The intrigue of his character is his personal pathos.

Click to expand...

Which I would argue is the heart of what the new Superman movie is about. People are complaining that it's emo Superman, but it's trying to make the argument that this is the essence of Superman. The outsider, the one who is invulnerable but has to protect the ones he loves. The one who has a past filled with tragedy as well. All that, based on the trailers, appears to be in this movie.

Click to expand...

I'd say that such tragic things would make the best character moments for the character. One of my favorite defining moments in the first Reeve movie is the funeral for his father lamenting the uselessness of all his powers in that moment of Pa Kent's death.

Click to expand...

Similarly, the end of the movie was about how he couldn't save the person he loved because he was saving the rest of the world--it would have been nice to have found away to fix this situation without having to reset the world.

Which I would argue is the heart of what the new Superman movie is about. People are complaining that it's emo Superman, but it's trying to make the argument that this is the essence of Superman. The outsider, the one who is invulnerable but has to protect the ones he loves. The one who has a past filled with tragedy as well. All that, based on the trailers, appears to be in this movie.

Click to expand...

I'd say that such tragic things would make the best character moments for the character. One of my favorite defining moments in the first Reeve movie is the funeral for his father lamenting the uselessness of all his powers in that moment of Pa Kent's death.

Click to expand...

Similarly, the end of the movie was about how he couldn't save the person he loved because he was saving the rest of the world--it would have been nice to have found away to fix this situation without having to reset the world.

Click to expand...

But the crack behind the car and putting Luthor in jail would indicate the nuke still hit, he just saved Lois. He uses his powers selfishly or in a manner growing up past his fathers, or both.

But the bottom line is that there can be lot of drama to the Superman character. The point is that despite his awesome powers he still has emotional vulnerabilities. He also has people that he cares about. Through these elements, he can still be hurt. A great story doesn't have to be about a physical fight.